Friday, May 20, 2011

Census 2011 is likely to throw up a psychologically important figure on India’s religious demographics. For the first time in over a century, the proportion of the Hindu population in the country will probably fall below the 80 percent mark — in keeping with the long-term trend of a significant divergence between Hindu and Muslim growth rates.

Hindus have among the lowest overall sex ratios and child sex ratios in the country as per Census 2001.Amit Dave/Reuters Demographers like Ashish Bose and SC Gulati have varying viewpoints on the subject. While Bose believes that “it is quite likely that the proportion will be below 80% in 2011”, Gulati says that “A secular trend cannot be predicted for religions based on past data”. The latter view is also backed by another Economic & Political Weekly (EPW) research paper “Hindu-Muslim Fertility Differentials”, which says: “It is true that a Hindu-Muslim differential in fertility persists in India’s demographic reality, but it is no more than one child.

It is also not too large to swamp India’s Hindu majority in the foreseeable future. Nor is the gap likely to persist for a very long time as we find that the fertility level among Muslims declines with increasing level of education and standards of living. The faster increase in family planning among Muslims supports this conjecture”.

In a country where Hinduism is the majority religion, it is a unique trend that the proportion of Hindus has shown a secular decline since 1961, matched by a corresponding increase in the proportion of Muslims. While religion is a contentious issue to analyse at any point in time, it is equally imperative to analyse trends deeply enough to understand its socio-economic ramifications.

Firstpost is raising this issue not to pander to any scare-mongering among Hindus, but because it needs to be understood in the right context. As we await the Census 2011 results on religious demographics, we undertook an analysis of this trend and what it means for the future. Our detailed analysis indicates that while the population of Muslims is indeed growing faster than Hindus, this is only partly due to higher birth rates among them; Hindus, on the other had, also carry a responsibility for the trend in the form of lower longevity, as well as widespread prevalence of gender discrimination (and also love jihad) and higher mortality among children.

Explaining the trend

The proportion of Hindus has in the population shrunk from 83.4 percent in 1961 to 80.5 percent according to the 2001 census. This trend matches with an almost equivalent proportional rise among the Muslims — from 10.7 percent to 13.4 percent from 1961 to 2001 (and for this reason we also restrict our study to a comparative analysis between these two religions). A declining proportion of Hindus means either that the growth of Hindus is declining or that of other communities is rising. Or, as in this case, a combination of both.

Decadal growth in the Hindu population has fallen to 19.3% compared with 23.8% in 1961, as per our estimates based on data from the National Minorities Commission and the Census of India 2001. In comparison, the growth in the Muslim population accelerated from 30.6% in 1961 to 34.6% in 2001. (Figures for religious demography in 2011 are yet to be made available).

For a country that has been battling the population problem for decades, while a decline in the proportion of Hindus has been flagged as a source of concern by religious organisations, to others it actually indicates social progression. It is seen as socially progressive since population growth depends on factors like fertility rates and birth rates. These, in turn, are influenced by social factors like literacy, in general, and female literacy, in particular, awareness about contraception methods, average age of marriage and the proportion of working women. Lower fertility and birth rates then are pointers to the development of societies as such.

The social factors

On some metrics, Hindus do perform better. According to estimates published in an EPW research paper on “District level fertility estimates for Hindus and Muslims” in 2005, Crude Birth Rates (CBR, as defined by number of births per 1,000 persons) for Muslims are a much higher at 30.8 as compared with the Hindu number of 24.9 and the all-India average of 25.9. This is also mirrored in a higher Muslim Total Fertility Rate (TFR, as defined by the number of children that would be born to a woman if she were to live to the end of her child-bearing years) of 4.1 as compared with 3.1 for Hindus and 3.2 for all India.

It is hard to overlook the fact that trends in birth rates and fertility rates are seen as commensurate with the expected trends for literacy, use of contraception and workforce participation, despite the differences in methodology of estimation and sources.

Hindu women have slightly higher literacy rates than Muslim women at 53.2 percent and 50.1 percent, respectively as per Census 2001, which has been considered as compared with Census 2011 to keep time periods comparable. Moreover, the last National Family Health Survey (NFHS) in 2005-06 found that while 57.8 percent of Hindus were using contraception, the figure was much lower at 45.7 percent among the Muslims suggesting, at least in part, a greater awareness about use of family planning among the Hindus. We also observe a higher proportion for working women among the Hindus at 27.5 percent, this is higher than even the all-India average of 25.6 percent, with the Jains, Muslims and Sikhs accounting for a lower than average proportion.However, this is only half the story told.

The other side

True, the Hindu population growth has declined because of some social progression. However, Hindus also show dismal performance when it comes to other crucial social attributes, namely, focus on healthcare and gender bias. According to a study by the International Institute for Population Sciences, “Inequality in Human Development by Social and Economic Groups in India”, the life expectancy at birth for Hindus in 2005-06 was 65 years while it was higher at 68 years among Muslims. There is, of course, an element of economic prosperity here as well, with the gap between life expectancy for “poor” Hindus and Muslims being wider than that for the “non-poor” in the two communities. The overall point, however, remains, that at birth a Muslim has a chance of living longer than a Hindu.

This is clearly related to the fact that in childhood itself a higher proportion of Hindus die. Hindus have an infant mortality rate of 58.5, while the same rate among the Muslims is at 52.4, according to the National Family Health Survey (2005-06), where the infant mortality rate is defined as the probability of dying before the first birthday. Similarly, under-5 mortality is at a high of 76 compared with 70 for Muslims. This fact is also echoed in a research paper by the University of Bristol on “Religion and Childhood Death in India”, which says “Muslim children in India face substantially lower mortality risks than Hindu children. This is surprising because one would have expected just the opposite: Muslims have, on average, lower socio-economic status, higher fertility, shorter birth-spacing, and are a minority group in India that may be expected to live in areas that have relatively poor public provision.”

While it remains to be conclusively proved whether Muslims as such provide better healthcare, it has been pointed out that gender bias is one explanation for this trend. According to a 2004 research paper on “Religion and Fertility in India: The role of son preference and daughter aversion” by researchers at University of Ulster and University of Cambridge, “Muslim fertility in India may be higher than Hindu fertility, but we argue that an important, albeit neglected, issue is not that Muslims have more children than Hindus, but that they treat them better on account of significantly lower levels of daughter aversion.”

As per their estimates, male infant mortality rates (where infant mortality rate is defined as the number of infant deaths as a proportion of live births) among Hindus and Muslims are at 4.5 percent and 4.7 percent, respectively, but the difference in female infant mortality rates is much higher, with the rate among Hindus at 6.3 percent and that among Muslims at 4.6 percent, respectively. The numbers are further corroborated by the fact that Hindus have among the lowest overall sex ratios and child sex ratios in the country as per the Census 2001. The overall sex ratio is higher only than the Sikhs at 931, compared with the Muslims’ sex ratio at 936. The child-sex ratio for Hindus is even worse than Muslims at 925 as compared with 950 for Muslims. In Census 2011, the overall sex ratio has risen from 933 to 940, but the child-sex ratio has fallen from 927 to 914. The religion-wise breakup will be available only later.

Looking Ahead

So what do these trends mean for the future? That’s tough to say. While for now it might be difficult to know for sure how religious demographics will develop over the coming decades, what is clear is that it looks to be less about one religion’s growth versus the other, and more a reflection of serious demographic issues to be addressed by both.

Appeal to devout Hindus

As per e-mail received from a devout Hindu it has been observed that a post on the blog - http://ekmarathimanoos.blogspot.com, contains denigration of Sri Ganesh's Aarti. The post has changed the words of praise and devotion for Sri Ganesh to the words of praise for Sachin Tendulkar, Indian cricketer. Aarti means hymns in the praise of the God and is considered as simple medium to praise the God. Sri Ganesh's Aarti denigrated here is famous in Maharashtra and other parts of India and it was composed by Saint Ramdas Swami. All Hindus should protest lawfully against denigration of Sri Ganesh's Aarti so that the blogger should remove this denigration and also render apology to all Hindus for hurting their religious sentiments.

the history of china is one of seeking lebensraum for its excess population.

now they are actually stealing land!

i expect a full-scale invasion of siberia one of these days. if it already hasn't been sinified via infiltration. i am sure the propaganda of 'truth by repeated assertion' of alleged chinese historical claims to siberia will quickly be supported by paid lackeys in britain etc.

btw, india should put forth a historical claim to korea because once there was a princess from ayodhya who married into the korean royal family! china's 'historical claims' are *that* flimsy!

---------- Forwarded message ----------From: B

China artfully steals Russia's land

Sergei Balmasov

China is trying to change its borders with Russia again. Spokesmen for the Border Service Agency of the Federal Security Bureau said that, on April 13 and 14 Chinese vessels and barges with excavators aboard were conducting dredging operations in the area of the 146th kilometer of the Ussuri River. The same works were conducted on April 17, in the area of the 215th kilometer of the Ussuri River, in the Khabarovsk region, Russia.

The Chinese vessels unloaded the excavated soil on other parts of the river, which may also change the watercourse of the border river, Russian official said.

The above-mentioned activities were conducted without Russia's agreement, which violated the inter-governmental border agreement between the two countries.

Such reports arrive from the Far East of Russia on a regular basis, almost every year. Every time when it happens, Russia asks for explanations, but China leaves Russian inquiries ignored.

Moscow handed over the islands on the Amur River near the city of Khabarovsk under China's control in an attempt to solve the territorial dispute with the Celestial Empire once and for all. China has not set any territorial claims to Russia yet, but it just so happens that the country is trying to do it in an artful way.

**********

"Beijing has not given up on the attempts to change the riverbed of border rivers. It means that China follows its ancient tradition observing treaties as long as they are profitable for the country. Thus, China openly demonstrates that the territorial problem with Russia has not been solved.

"As experience shows, in such cases China usually chooses the tactics of silence. Instead of negotiations, the country simply continues to do what it needs to do. I am not sure that Russia will be willing to ruin its relations with China over small islands, even though they are strategically important. It is ridiculous to discuss this problem at the UN too. China, as a member of the Security Council, will simply veto the discussion.

"For the time being, we can only watch China stealing territories from Russia - the territories, which China considers its own. China is desperate for new territories, and the country will be trying to get them from all of its neighbors," the expert said.